Sure enough, the Guardian didn’t disappoint. Harriet Sherwood chose to ignore Palestinians CELEBRATING the murder of 4 Israelis, and instead decided the most pressing story – and the most serious impediment to peace – was not terrorism against innocent Israeli civilians, but, rather, statements by some West Bank settlers that they’re going to continue building homes.

These supposed starving refugees living in a prison camp do not appear starving, they are well clothed eating sweets, and have so much energy, unlike the starving children in Zimbabwe. Since when can supposed starving populations feast on sweets, we in the West have truly been conned by the likes of the Guardian. But remember Niemoller’s poem ‘first they came for the … then they came for me’. It is disturbing to see parents encouraging their children to celebrate PURE MURDER.

What should be of concern, and I daresay it is because you are sharing your views with us here, is why the Guardian and the rest of the media so easily falls for these lies when the proof that they are lies hits them over the head again and again.

It sets out why Guardianistas cling on to and continue to perpetuate these myths and why they are such excellent dupes for the islamists who use them to spread their malignant message and who write for them.

They have to protect Gaza from its own image in the media. They have never yet published a picture of the water parks, hotels, restaurants, mall. Their objective is to continually vilify Israel by portraying Gaza as the most persecuted place on earth, filled with noble freedom fighters. The article by Ghada Karmi starts:

“There is a real danger that the Israeli-Palestinian peace talks due to start on September 2 in Washington could yield a botched deal that falls far short of the needs of international law or elemental justice, and sets back the cause of Palestine for decades, if not for ever. ”

Clearly, any deal that gives the Palestinians anything less than the whole of israel is “botched”.

In World War 2, the UK – another democracy – made any act or speech which undermined the war effort a criminal one, punishable by a prison sentence. Were this “toerag” to write as she did in the UK then, she’d be in prison before her feet could touch the ground.

This toerag is much more than “wrongheaded” or “disagreeable.” She is spiteful, and malicious and, for all I know, dangerous to Israel.

Journalism should be the objective reporting of a given incident/situation.
It’s no longer that. A new definition seems to be required for many of today’s ‘Harriet’s’: Journalism is the subjective; the manipulation/spinning of facts to suit a) me and b) whoever is paying me.

These people influence public opinion which in turn influences outcomes. They should be more aware of the real responsibility they have when those outcomes are dire.

SarahLeah: I understand that Israel has been for its entire 62 year history, either at war or having to deal with the threat of war. However, my point is that Israel is also a robust democracy dedicated to press freedoms, even when the “journalist” in question is intellectually dishonest.

That’s one of Israel’s strengths as a society.

Besides, deporting Harriet Sherwood would just give The Guardian ammunition and gain nothing for Israel.

Looking at the Guardian’s World News page just now, I noticed the “Foreign correspondence” section on the right.
Four pieces:
– the trapped Chilean miners
– data privacy in China
– women in the Afghan elections
– an Israeli novelist on why he opposes his govt.’s policy towards Palestinians

That latter one was online before the murders – but it does all add up in general terms, doesn’t it?